Property Tax Assessment

The appellants appealed the 2017 property assessment of their residential property, arguing that the returned value of $945,000 was too high because it failed to account for the negative impact of nearby train tracks.

The Assessment Review Board reviewed comparable sales provided by both parties.

The Board found that the appellants' comparable sales on the same street supported a current value of $965,000, and that no adjustment for the train tracks was warranted as the property was not sufficiently proximate.

As the determined current value was higher than the returned assessment and MPAC did not seek an increase, the Board confirmed the returned assessment of $945,000.

The Board also found the assessment to be equitable based on MPAC's equity analysis.

The appellant appealed the 2017 property assessment of a waterfront single-family detached home in Oakville, originally assessed at $2,195,000.

The appellant argued for a lower valuation based on a non-waterfront comparable sale, while MPAC and the Town of Oakville presented waterfront comparables from outside the immediate neighbourhood due to a lack of local sales.

The Assessment Review Board rejected the appellant's non-waterfront comparable and analyzed the respondents' waterfront sales.

The Board determined the correct current value to be $2,044,000, reducing the assessment for the 2017 and deemed 2018 taxation years, and found this value to be equitable with similar lands in the vicinity.

The appellants appealed the property assessment of their property for the 2017 taxation year, arguing the revised current value assessment of $198,000 was too high and should be reduced by 25% due to location factors and arsenic contamination.

The Assessment Review Board found insufficient market evidence to support the appellants' requested 25% reduction or adjustments for contamination and location.

The Board accepted MPAC's comparable sales to determine the current value at $198,000.

However, applying an equity analysis based on the median assessment-to-sales ratio of similar properties, the Board reduced the final assessment to $186,000 for the 2017 and deemed 2018 taxation years.

The appellants appealed the current value assessment of their residential property for the 2017 and deemed 2018 taxation years.

The Assessment Review Board determined the current value of the property to be $660,000, reducing it from the returned assessment of $693,000, based on the most comparable time-adjusted sale.

The Board dismissed the appellants' request for an equitable reduction, finding that the median assessment-to-sale ratio of similar properties in the vicinity indicated that the level of assessment was equitable.

The appellants appealed the 2017 current value assessment of their residential property, which was returned at $1,043,000.

They argued the value should be reduced due to the lot's irregular shape, corner location, and external factors.

MPAC presented a valuation study supporting a value of $1,071,000 but sought to confirm the returned value.

The Assessment Review Board found the current value to be $1,052,000 after applying a 2% corner lot adjustment.

The Board further applied an equity reduction based on the median assessment-to-sale ratio of 0.949 for similar properties in the vicinity, resulting in a final assessment of $998,000 for the 2017 and deemed 2018 taxation years.

The Requester, Allegra Homes Sheppard Inc., sought a review of an Assessment Review Board decision that confirmed the subject property's assessment at $1,645,000 in the commercial property class for the 2012 taxation year.

The Board denied the request for review because it was filed more than 30 days after the decision was issued, without an adequate explanation for the delay.

Furthermore, the Board found that even if the request had been timely, it would have been dismissed on the merits, as the Requester failed to demonstrate that the Presiding Member made a significant error of law or fact.

The appellant appealed the 2017 and 2018 property assessments of his residential property, arguing the value should be reduced to $755,000 due to nuisance factors such as aircraft noise, train traffic, and potential well water contamination.

The respondent MPAC maintained a value of $866,000.

The Assessment Review Board rejected the appellant's expert evidence as poorly explained and inconsistent.

After analyzing comparable sales, the Board determined the current value of the property to be $800,000 and reduced the assessments for both taxation years accordingly.

The appellant appealed the 2017 property assessment of her water-access island property in Georgian Bay, which MPAC had assessed at $593,000.

The appellant argued the value should be lower due to its legal non-conforming status and building restrictions.

The Assessment Review Board analyzed comparable sales and determined the current value to be $576,000.

The Board declined to make a further equitable reduction, finding that MPAC's assessment-to-sale ratio study demonstrated that similar properties in the vicinity were assessed equitably.

The assessment was reduced to $576,000 for the 2017 and deemed 2018 taxation years.

The appellant appealed the property assessment of his single-family home for the 2017 and 2018 taxation years, seeking a reduction of $200,000 to $300,000 due to increased aircraft noise from a changed flight path.

MPAC presented comparable sales supporting a current value of $1,188,267 but requested confirmation of the returned assessment of $1,159,000.

The Assessment Review Board analyzed the comparable sales and determined the current value to be $1,149,000.

The Board declined to make a further reduction for aircraft noise, finding that the comparable sales in the vicinity already accounted for locational elements including the noise.

The assessment was reduced to $1,149,000.

The appellants appealed the 2017 property assessment of their single-family residence to the Assessment Review Board.

MPAC assessed the current value at $647,000, while the appellants argued for a value of $532,626.

The Board reviewed comparable sales and determined the correct current value to be $660,000.

Applying an equitable reduction factor of 0.918 based on MPAC's equity analysis, the Board reduced the assessed value to $605,000 for the 2017 and deemed 2018 taxation years.

The appellant appealed the 2017 and deemed 2018 property assessment of his vacant, swampy land in Montague Township, arguing the $78,000 assessment was too high and should be reduced to $45,000 due to development limitations.

The Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) defended the assessment using comparable sales of other swampy vacant land in the area.

The Assessment Review Board found that the comparable sales evidence supported the $78,000 valuation and that there was no evidence to suggest the assessment was inequitable.

The appeal was dismissed and the assessment was confirmed.

The moving party brought a motion seeking permission for the late filing of a property assessment appeal.

The Assessment Review Board determined that the appeal was not actually late.

Because the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) failed to mail its response to the Request for Reconsideration within the 180-day statutory deadline, the filing deadline was extended to 90 days after the notice should have been mailed pursuant to subsection 40(5) of the Assessment Act.

The appeal was filed well before this extended deadline and will be processed.

The appellants appealed the 2016 current value assessment of their residential property, which MPAC had assessed at $4,777,000.

The appellants argued the assessment should be reduced based on the property's sale for $4,500,000 in December 2016, 59 months after the January 1, 2012 valuation date.

The Assessment Review Board found the subsequent sale of the subject property, adjusted for time, was the best evidence of value.

Applying a 28.1% time adjustment and weighting the subject sale against one comparable sale, the Board reduced the assessment to $3,881,000.

The Board declined to make an equity adjustment.

The appellants appealed the 2017 property assessment of their single-family detached home in Toronto, arguing the returned value of $945,000 was too high due to the nuisance of nearby train tracks.

MPAC presented sales data supporting a higher value, while the appellants presented comparable sales on the same street.

The Assessment Review Board found the appellants' comparable sales supported a current value of $965,000 and rejected the train track nuisance argument for lack of quantifiable evidence.

As MPAC did not seek an increase, the Board confirmed the returned assessment of $945,000 and found it to be fair and equitable.

The appellants appealed the current value assessment of their 39.38-acre waterfront property on Bright Lake for the 2015 and 2016 taxation years.

MPAC had assessed the property at $216,000 for 2015 and $173,000 for 2016.

The appellants argued the value should be approximately $40,000 because a significant portion of the property is swampy and undevelopable.

The Assessment Review Board found that the best comparable sale indicated a value of $4,194.74 per acre, but accepted the appellant's evidence that 50% of the land was swampy and should be valued at a lower rate of $794 per acre.

The Board reduced the assessment to $98,000 for both taxation years.

The City of Toronto appealed the residential classification of a vacant lot for the 2015 and 2016 taxation years.

The parties consented to reclassify the property as multi-residential.

The assessed person challenged the assessed value of $3,806,000.

The Assessment Review Board found that the initial assessment incorrectly applied a corner lot premium and an unsupported rate per square foot.

Based on sales evidence of similar multi-residential development sites, the Board determined the current value using a rate of $55 per square foot applied to the approved buildable area of 68,340 square feet.

The assessment was reduced to $3,759,000, which the Board found equitable with similar lands in the vicinity.

The appellant appealed the property tax assessment of a commercial office building in Burlington for the 2013-2016 taxation years.

The parties agreed on using the Income Approach to determine current value but disputed the Fair Market Rent (FMR) and the value of parking to be deducted, as the building had no on-site parking.

The Assessment Review Board determined the FMR to be $12.56 per square foot based on existing leases and calculated the parking deduction using the assessed value of a linked parking lot.

The Board found the current value to be $5,795,000, which was further reduced to $5,215,000 to ensure equity with similar properties in the vicinity.

The appellants appealed the property assessment of a vacant industrial property in Fort Erie for the 2015 taxation year.

MPAC assessed the property at $1,125,000 using the cost approach.

The appellants argued the current value should be $500,000, reflecting the property's 2014 sale price, piecemeal construction, and environmental contamination.

The Assessment Review Board found the 2014 sale price of $500,000 to be the best evidence of current value, noting it aligned with the market value per square foot of comparable vacant properties.

The Board reduced the assessment to $500,000 and found no further equity adjustment was required.

The decision also applied to the deemed 2016 appeal.

The moving party, 100 Wynford Portfolio Inc., brought a motion to compel the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) to produce third-party income, expense, and assessment information for comparable properties in relation to its property assessment appeals.

The moving party argued the information was relevant to determining fair market rents and area calculations for its commercial office building.

MPAC and the third-party property owners consented to the production subject to confidentiality and non-disclosure undertakings.

The Assessment Review Board granted the motion, finding that the moving party had complied with notice requirements, and ordered MPAC to produce the requested documents to the moving party's counsel and consultants upon execution of the undertakings.

The appellants appealed the 2015 property assessment of their six-unit motel, which MPAC assessed at $229,000.

The appellants argued the value was lower due to stigma and unrest related to adjacent First Nations lands.

The Assessment Review Board found the best evidence of current value was the property's 2012 sale price of $224,000.

The Board further reduced the assessment to $205,000 to ensure equity with similar commercial properties in the vicinity, applying the median per-square-foot value of comparable properties to the commercial component.